Questions & Responses on Chapter 8: Critical Theory in a New Writing Space
The eighth chapter of the book, "Critical Theory in a New Writing Space" interested me a lot, which is why I chose to do a web presentation on the chapter. Although I may not always agree with the many ways in which technology is being used to access new forms of literature and used to as a new way to critique literature; I always welcome a debate on the effectiveness of new patterns of distribution and interpretation of the literary arts. Personally, I have a great concern over what has been non-ceremoniously dubbed the "end of authorship" by a few writers and columnists. I support the idea of forming new styles of criticism as new styles of publication emerge; but I am nevertheless worried, as many others are, about whether the potential lies in alternative media to eliminate the intimate authority established by an experienced author on his subject matter. Aaron
There are a variety of forms of creating and accessing information, however, with all the good, comes with all the bad. I think it is wonderful that there are so many ways to do both, however, I think that there should be more guidelines. For example, it seems that people are more likely to steal and plagiarize over the internet. I also think that writing things out by hand is a different creative process, than simply just going to the computer and typing it all out—it is more machine-like. I think that since today, literally anyone can put anything on the internet, for example, blogs. I think that this somewhat destroys the view of authorship and creditability. Maybe now some people do not view publishing as hard of a task? I think there is a time and a place for all the various forms of texts. However, I think that people need to be responsible and respectful of decisions. Combinations of old and new technology can help our society, or they can hurt us. Do you think that purely hypertextual novels are taken as seriously as novels that were originally only in print? Carrie
This chapter involved critical writing in a new space. A question I have is if this new writing world of the web is so popular why does it seem that people still gravitate towards hardbound books? Does it make the book seem more legit? The problem of course I have with any cannon is that ultimately it was decided and decreed by a certian type of individuals. Does the idea of "traditional works" not apply in the web world? Should there be a cannon for the web? If there does become a cannon who would regulate it? This chapter was really detailed in each theory and really went over all the arguments about what a book and literature is and whom decides it is "classic". I thought the therioes were interesting and thought provoking on how we read what we read. Hannah K
I don't know if the fact of our version of the book being off press in 2001 plays a factor but, it's sad if traditionalist's regard regard electronic technology as threat to literary values. The web has personified and surpassed any amount written literature on the market for it cuts out the middle man. With the knowledge of being able to publish on the web you no longer have to look for a publisher and distributor in order to disburse your ideas and wait for it to not only hit the market but to be purchased for people to read. With the correct metatag it's all available with the simple inquiry from a search engine. This is not to discredit the works of the great authors of the past but rather embracing new technology as it develops. THEORETICALLY speaking...I"m sure any of the great authors (Take your pick) If they had the oppurtunity would embrace any technology that would enable them to immortalize their work. I consider it irrelevant if a work was "meant to be read in a book and not on a computer screen" people who make those statements are assuming too much. As long as the original message is not lost in transition it matters not the method transmission. Jay
The author explains that, in the earliest publications, any reader could easily become a writer. Once publication became more of a production, a separation between reader and writer evolved. Do you think web pages and hyperfiction have brought the writer and reader back together, similar to early publications, or have people abused the ease of web publishing to the point that terms like reader and writer (when concerned with hypertext) no longer hold much value? Jim
There are two issues in this chapter that I have a concern with. I don't really see how electronic text is a threat to books. I understand the point that it's changing the role of the author, but I don't really think it's threatening authors. Electronic text might actually create a larger audience for the author. By finding summaries or actual books on the web it allows better access to the material. I always think that the whole point of a library or the world wide web is for us to share our knowledge and question what we read to gain more knowledge. My other issue is the list of important books to read. It's fine to create a list of recommendations but I don't think anything should be required. Human motivation is determined by choice. When we allow readers to choose what they want to read they are more likely to read the material and understand it. If the reader chooses to read a good classic that's great, but if they don't that was their choice. Megan
This chapter seemed uch more informative and didn't really ask any questions. The one problem I had witht he text was comparing hypertext to a drama or playwright, these forms or writting are developed with an audience in mind so they can perform the authors works fully. Hypertext may be aided at a specific audience but the level of interaction between text and reader is more of a personal one. It may not be a linear path but it is a personal path which will differ person to person. Not because it has to (drama's and playwright's are locked into their purpose) but because the reader makes the personal choice to do so. Rusell
What I find interesting about this chapter is on the bottom of page 171 under the caption "Reader Response." It says the literary theorists of the 70s and 80s emphasized the role of the reader. That the task of literary criticism was not to examine the text in isolation, but rather to understand the text through its effect on the reader. Books are not about the text, they are about the effects of the text, the meaning. Stacey |